[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: exchange type 6?
At 5:24 PM -0500 2/21/01, Andrew Krywaniuk wrote:
> > Don't you think that the response Derrell received should
> > be the response
> > you receive?
>
>No, I thought the WG and IANA should have accomodated Derrell's request.
>
>I believe it is more important to be sensible than to be consistent. Others
>may disagree.
>
>Reserving exchange mode 6 doesn't mean the WG has to give credence to config
>mode. They can allocate it as "deprecated" for all I care.
>
I tend to agree with Dan here, although there is legitimate room for
disagreement. Formally allocating a number to a proposed anything
gives it credence in the eyes of many users. Some folks feel that
it's OK to do this allocation even if the proposed thing does not
become a standard, e.g., to facilitate testing etc.
Personally I vote for sensible AND consistent :-)
Steve
Follow-Ups:
References: